The proposal is simple: when Democrats next hold the presidency and Senate, they should pack the courts to ensure that the Left can achieve its goals.
Texts revealed a relationship between FBI agent Peter Strzok and Judge Rudolph Contreras. Does that cast suspicion on Contreras’ recusal from the Flynn case Strzok investigated?
We have divergent interpretive theories that map onto ideologically sorted parties, so is it any surprise that elections are high-stakes for judges?
Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards is right: Courts matter. They matter because liberal judges long ago stopped interpreting the law and started inventing it.
President Trump has plenty of qualified, pro-life nominees in tow. Yet that’s not enough, because getting them confirmed has been nearly impossible.
This week, in an echo of the 21 contenders for the Supreme Court rolled out during the campaign, 11 would-be black-robers join last month’s stellar list of 10 lower-court nominees.
How increasingly letting states and citizens sue to stop laws and regulations they don’t like, such as President Trump’s immigration order, can politicize courts and end self-government.
Democratic state legislators want to require presidential candidates to publicly disclose their tax returns. There’s a constitutional problem with that.
The Supreme Court’s ability to issue a binding opinion on any subject that no one else could overturn is inconsistent with the checks and balances the Framers crafted.
Once I had the opportunity to serve in the Wisconsin legislature I realized just how severely flawed is the idea of looking to legislative history for guidance in statutory interpretation.
If you look at characteristics other than skin tone and Y-chromosome, you could hardly get a more varied set of candidates to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat.
If widely embraced, judicial engagement would give constitutional conservatives something to get genuinely excited about.
To truly merit a place on the Supreme Court—whether for Merrick Garland or someone else—the next appointee must understand the constitutional power he or she exercises.
We must be of good cheer. We are not yet old and fragile. Constitutional governance is, Justice Scalia himself said, ‘worth fighting for, win or lose.’
Lifetime appointments have failed their intended purpose of ensuring judicial independence.
- The Left And The Right Aren’t Hearing The Same Jordan PetersonA New York Times Magazine hit piece says more about thecontinue reading >
- BREAKING: E-mails Show FBI Brass Discussed Dossier Briefing Details With CNNNew e-mails show that FBI brass discussed details aboutcontinue reading >
- Did The Obama Administration Spy On Trump Using Flimsy Evidence? Let’s Find OutIf the Justice Department is as incorruptible as its decontinue reading >